Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 May 2026WPC/2206/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

paddy lifting; procurement centre; infructuous writ petition; State Paddy Procurement Scheme Kharif Marketing Year 2025-2026; deadline 31.03.2026; paddy deficit inquiry; tripartite agreement; Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Baasin Gariyaband; Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act 1960; Markfed; Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank; mandamus; cooperative society liability; liberty to seek remedies.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief granted: petition disposed of as infructuous after the entire paddy stock was lifted. Petitioner given liberty to avail appropriate remedies and initiate proceedings in accordance with law if any liability is sought to be fastened for the alleged paddy shortage; authorities directed to conduct the inquiry in accordance with the tripartite agreement between the parties. ¶¶36

Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to lift the remaining procured paddy stock lying at the petitioner's procurement centre and to discharge their policy obligation of timely lifting. +1 more

¶¶25

Court's answer

Since the entire paddy stock has been lifted from the procurement centre, the writ petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

¶¶36

Ratio / Principle

In the event any future exigency arises in relation to the alleged shortage of paddy, or if any liability is sought to be fastened upon the petitioner or any concerned authority, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies and initiate proceedings in accordance with law.

¶¶37

Key takeaways

The concerned authorities are directed to conduct the inquiry into the paddy deficit in accordance with the tripartite agreement between the parties.ratio¶¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WPC No. 2206 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J., order dated 05/05/2026): A registered cooperative society (Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin, Distt. Gariyaband) had sought mandamus for time-bound lifting of procured paddy lying at its procurement centre under the State Paddy Procurement Scheme (Kharif Marketing Year 2025-2026), whose stipulated lifting deadline of 31.03.2026 had expired, along with protection from liability for loss or deterioration caused by delayed lifting. Counsel for respondent No. 3 submitted that the entire stock had already been lifted but a paddy deficit had been detected and an inquiry to fix responsibility was underway. The Court held the petition infructuous and disposed of it, while clarifying that the petitioner remains free to pursue appropriate remedies in accordance with law if any liability is later fastened upon it, and directing the authorities to conduct the inquiry in accordance with the tripartite agreement between the parties.

2026:CGHC:20867

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 2206 of 2026

¶6

Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 1 - Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin Registration No. 991, A Society Registered Under The Chhattisgarh Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 And Having Its Registered Address At Baasin, DistrictGariyaband, Chhattisgarh Through Its Manager-In-Charge Shri Dinesh Kumar Chandrakar, S/o Baldau Ram, Age 51 Years, R/o 22 Kumhi, Kirwai, Distt.- Gariyaband, Pin 493885, C.G.

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - District Marketing Officer Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Ltd. (Cg Markfed), Gariyaband, Behind Sbi, Near TehsilDistrictGariyaband, Chhattisgarh. Email- [email protected]

¶11

3 - Chief Executive Officer Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Raipur, G.E. Road, Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur, Pin - 492001, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

¶13

4 - Nodal Officer, Distt.- Gariyaband Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Raipur, G.E. Road, Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur, Pin - 492001, Chhattisgarh. Email- [email protected]

¶14

5 - Collector District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh District Collectorate Office Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh 493889 Email - [email protected]

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

(Cause Title is taken from CIS System)

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Mallick Sudip Ravi, Advocate For State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer For MARKFED : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate For Resp. No. 3 and 4 : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate

¶18

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

05/05/2026

¶21

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs :

¶22

“A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing Respondent No. 2 and other concerned Respondents to immediately lift the entire procured paddy stock lying at the

¶23

¶24

Petitioner's procurement centre within a fixed time-bound period;

¶25

B) Direct the Respondents to immediately lift the remaining paddy stock lying at the Petitioner's procurement centre and to discharge their policy obligations of timely lifting, which have been breached despite expiry of the stipulated period on 31.03.2026;

¶26

C) Direct that any loss, damage, deterioration, shrinkage or any adverse consequences, including any legal or administrative action arising due to delayed, slow or untimely lifting of paddy, shall be borne by the State/concerned Respondents and shall not be fastened upon the Petitioner Society or its Manager;

¶27

D) Grant any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

¶28

Brief facts of the case are that the present writ petition has been filed seeking urgent and appropriate directions for the lifting of procured paddy stock under the State Paddy Procurement Scheme for the Kharif Marketing Year 2025–2026. It is submitted

¶29

¶30

that the petitioner has duly completed procurement in accordance with the prescribed policy guidelines; however, owing to the failure of the respondent authorities to lift the procured stock within the stipulated deadline of 31.03.2026, a substantial quantity of paddy remained unlifted at the procurement centre. It is further submitted that despite making repeated representations and requests to the concerned authorities, no effective or timely action was taken in this regard. It is contended that the continued retention of such stock beyond the prescribed timeline resulted in serious operational difficulties, financial burden, and potential risks of damage, deterioration, and loss, thereby causing grave prejudice to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court seeking immediate directions to the respondent authorities for lifting of the paddy stock and for protection against any consequential liabilities or losses arising due to such inaction.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 submits that, insofar as the lifting of paddy is concerned, the entire stock has already been lifted from the procurement centre. However, it is further submitted that a deficit of paddy has been detected, and proceedings are presently underway to ascertain responsibility and to fasten liability upon the concerned persons in accordance with law. It is contended that, since the matter is currently under

¶32

¶33

inquiry, no further directions can be issued at this stage and, in view of the subsequent developments, the relief sought by the petitioner does not survive, rendering the present petition infructuous.

¶34

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, insofar as the relief relating to lifting of paddy is concerned, the same has already been satisfied as the entire stock has been lifted. However, with regard to relief No. C, it is submitted that since an inquiry is presently underway, no definitive conclusion can be drawn at this stage as to whether the petitioner is liable or otherwise, and therefore, the said issue may be considered in accordance with law upon completion of the inquiry.

¶35

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶36

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the fact that the writ petition has become infructuous, the same is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

However, it is clarified that in the event any future exigency arises in relation to the alleged shortage of paddy, or if any liability is sought to be fastened upon the petitioner or any concerned authority, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate

¶38

¶39

remedies and initiate proceedings in accordance with law. The concerned authorities are also directed to conduct the inquiry in accordance with the tripartite agreement between the parties.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶42

Shayna

Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gramin Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Baasin v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mini Mata Women Self Help Group- Korbi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Prabha Tirkey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramkumar Bandhale Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramkumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shashikumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chhotelal Vs State of Chhattisgarh